---

Chief Justice Anwar Usman alongside Constitutional Justices Wahiduddin Adams and Enny Nurbaningsih at the second hearing of the Bengkulu Province and Kaur Regency election results dispute hearing, Tuesday (2/2/2021) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held the second hearing of the 2020 regional head election (pilkada) results dispute cases No. 44/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 for Kaur Regency and No. 78/PHP.GUB-XIX/2021 for Bengkulu Province on Tuesday, February 2, 2021. It was presided over by chair Chief Justice Anwar Usman alongside Constitutional Justices Wahiduddin Adams and Enny Nurbaningsih.The agenda was to hear the Respondent’s response, the statements of the Relevant Party and Bawaslu (Elections Supervisory Body (Bawaslu), as well as to approve evidence.

The panel of justices began the hearing by examining the case No. 78/PHP.GUB-XIX/2021 by Agusrin M. Najamudin-Imron Rosyadi. The Bengkulu Province KPU’s (Respondent) attorney A. Amin stated that the Petitioner’s allegation that the Bengkulu Provincial KPU had declared them ineligible (TMS) without solid arguments wasn’t true. The KPU believes the decision had followed Law No. 1 of 2015 on the Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors. In addition, the KPU had processed the application of governor-vice governor candidates on September 4-6, 2020 as stipulated in the KPU Regulation (PKPU).

Amin further explained that the Respondent accepted the Petitioner’s application on September 6. On September 7, the Respondent and the working committee on the application and stipulation of candidates in the 2020 Bengkulu Province election had examined the authenticity of the candidates’ documents. However, on September 9-10 the Respondent confirmed that the Petitioner was a convict in the Class 1 Sukamiskin Correctional Facility.

Meanwhile, Candidate Pair No. 2 Rohidin Mersyah-Rosjonsyah (Relevant Party) claimed that the Petitioner’s petition was full of assumptions regarding administrative and criminal violations without any legal facts. “If the administrative and criminal violations alleged by the Petitioner was true, the authority to examine and decide on such violations is not within the Constitutional Court’s domain, but Bawaslu’s,” Arkan Cikwan stressed.

Therefore, in the petitum, the Relevant Party requested that the Court accept their objection in full and declare the petition obscure.

Letter of Appeal

Bengkulu Province Bawaslu through Dody Herwansyah stated that based on investigation on September 4-6, 2020 three governor-vice governor candidate pairs had applied and submitted their documents to the Respondent. Regarding the suspicion of abuse of COVID-19 funding, Bawaslu had sent a letter of appeal to warn against politicizing social assistance or abuse of COVID-19 funding for personal or group gains in the election.

At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioner argued that they lost votes due to structured, systematic, and massive (TSM) mobilization of up to 100,000 voters by Candidate Pair No. 2, involving polling station working committee (KPPS) members in five regencies: Mukomuko, North Bengkulu, Seluma, South Bengkulu, and Kaur. In addition, they alleged that these KPPS members had been instructed by unknown individuals to damage ballots for Candidate Pair No. 3, resulting in 65,000 invalid votes.

Kaur Regency KPU’s Refutation

At the same hearing, the panel also heard the 2020 Kaur Regency election dispute case No. 44/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 by Gusril Fausi-Medi Yuliardi. Kaur Regency KPU’s (Respondent) attorney Raden Liani Afrianty said the Petitioner’s allegation was unsubstantiated and legally groundless. The high voter turnout, extreme weather, and the COVID-19 pandemic were not enough reason to file the a quo case. She stressed that the Respondent had carried out its duties following existing regulations.

Meanwhile, Candidate Pair No. 2 LismidiantoHerlian Muchrim (Relevant Party) said that the Petitioner’s petitum and posita was not in sync. Attorney Satma Budhi Pramana said that the Petitioner explained in the petition that TSM violations had occurred. Such violations warrant disqualification, not a revote as the Petitioner requested. This shows the obscurity of the petition’s subject matter.

Next, Kaur Regency Bawaslu through Natijo Elem stressed that Bawaslu had received and registered suspected violations on December 14, 2020. They had asked for statements from the informant, the reported, the witnesses, the KPU chair and members, who all explained that all voters in attendance who voted at all polling stations (TPS) were listed in the final voters list (DPT), relocated voters list (DPPH), and additional final voters list (DPTb). He said none of the candidate pairs’ witnesses raised an objection to the C KWK form.

At the previous hearing, the Petitioner expressed doubt about the regency Bawaslu in supervising the regional election because they didn’t respond to several reports by the Petitioner against Candidate Pair No. 2 Lismidianto–Herlian Muchrim (Relevant Party), while a report against the Petitioner was responded immediately. The Petitioner was then declared to have committed a violation. Due to Bawaslu’s failure to be neutral, the Petitioner reported the Bawaslu’s chair and members to the Election Organizer Ethics Council (DKPP) in Jakarta on November 11, 2020 in case No. 147-PKE-DKPP/XI/2020. 

Writer: Utami Argawati
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari
Uploader: Fuad Subhan

Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti
Editor: R.A. Indah Apriyanti
Managing Editor: Budi Wijayanto

Translation uploaded on 02/03/2021 19:02 WIB

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian version, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---